Raj Kundra’s Bail Application Rejected

On the 28th of July 2021, a Mumbai Magistrate Court refused to grant bail sought by businessman Raj Kundra, arrested in a case of alleged production and distribution of pornographic films through apps.

Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda, counsel for Kundra, contended that since all the co-accused in the case had been released on bail, and the charge sheet had been filed a long time back, Kundra should also be granted relief. Counsel further contended that Kundra had been in custody for a considerable amount of time and that he has been sincerely co-operating with the investigation.

Ponda further argued that people who had committed worse crimes have been released on bail, whereas Kundra, whose offence stipulates a maximum punishment of 7 years, has yet to be granted bail. He went on to argue that the police had not followed the procedure laid down by law and had directly arrested Raj Kundra without issuing any prior notice in accordance with Section-41A of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Public prosecutor Aruna Kamat, refuted the argument that notice had not been given prior to arrest. The prosecution also informed the Court that the investigation was on going and argued that Kundra, if granted bail, could possibly tamper with evidence. It was also submitted that Kundra being a British national, was at flight risk.

Counsel for Kundra in reply to this apprehension, submitted that his clients passport was already in possession of the Crime Branch and that Kundra would be willing to abide by any and all restrictions being imposed by the Court. Counsel also assured the Court of the continued co-operation with the investigation. Ponda contended that the police were unable to point out even one single incident of Kundra trying to tamper with the evidence or threaten witnesses.

The Magistrate, after hearing both the counsels, rejected the bail application.

Kundra has been charged with offences under Section 292 and Section 293 of the IPC, Section 67 and Section 67A of the Information technology Act and various provisions of the Indecent Representation of Women (prohibition) Act 1986.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent Blogs